I didn't expect the ever-litigious McCourt to go down easy--after all, this is a man who had no problem exposing the brittle timbers in the foundation of his Dodgers empire when he engaged with his wife Jamie in their public divorce battle--and expected some move of escalation. Honestly, I expected him to be pissed off and angry about the situation, which clearly came as a sudden surprise to him as well as most Dodger fans.

However, I also didn't expect the rash of hyperbolic quotes mentioned in the ESPN.com article, which seem fairly hypocritical given all of the mud that has come out in the last 12 months:

Los Angeles Dodgers owner Frank McCourt expressed defiance and outrage during a news conference in New York on Wednesday after baseball commissioner Bud Selig vetoed McCourt's agreed-upon deal with Fox for a regional sports network. McCourt said the deal would infuse the club with enough cash to be competitive on the field for the forseeable future.

McCourt went so far as to describe Selig as "un-American" for what he sees as an attempt by Selig to unlawfully seize McCourt's property.

In a statement released after the news conference Wednesday, Rob Manfred, MLB's executive vice president of labor relations, took issue with McCourt's comments, both for airing them publicly and for being "not accurate."

"It is unfortunate that Mr. McCourt felt it necessary to publicize the content of a private meeting," Manfred said in the release. "It is even more unfortunate that Mr. McCourt's public recitation was not accurate. Most fundamental, Commissioner Selig did not 'veto' a proposed transaction. Rather, Mr. McCourt was clearly told that the Commissioner would make no decision on any transaction until after his investigation into the Club and its finances is complete so that he can properly evaluate all of the facts and circumstances."

McCourt hinted at a possible lawsuit against Selig and Major League Baseball.

"I have not decided exactly what we're going to do, but we will keep you posted," McCourt said after meeting with several baseball officials, but not Selig, at the league headquarters in Manhattan. "As I said, I am not going anywhere. This is the team I love and the community I love. These are my hard-earned dollars I put into this franchise, and I am going to protect my rights, obviously."

As I recall, McCourt was pretty highly leveraged throughout his ownership tenure, including the initial transaction which required a substantial loan from Fox. So I wouldn't exactly call it his "hard-earned dollars" at work here. But McCourt goes on:

McCourt also was asked to clarify a statement he made to a television reporter earlier in the day in which he called Selig "un-American."

"What I said was un-American was somebody's property being seized unlawfully," McCourt said. "There are core values in this country, and fairness is one of them. Transparency is another, and private property is another. Thankfully, it's not appropriate for one person's property to be seized by somebody else just because they get divorced or just because of some arbitrary reason. That is one of the great core principles and core values of this country, and that is what I'm referring to when I say it's just un-American to me."

I mean, I get it, McCourt wants to wave the flag and hide behind it, and unlawful seizure of property is one of the foundational issues our country tries to protect.

On the other hand, the core values of fairness and transparency that McCourt cites don't mesh whatsoever with the revelations that he siphoned over $100M from the franchise to fund his and his family's lifestyle.

Or that he gave mid-six-digit salaries to two sons either employed full-time in NYC or attending school full-time in the Bay Area.

I mean, I could go on here. Frank McCourt has every right to sound indignant. But to cite "fairness" and "transparency"--values which were betrayed by McCourt according to facts that came out in the divorce case--really rings hollow.

@NicJ, I agree, this seems like a lot of bombastic hyperbole to me, setting up a lawsuit, but inevitable sale. He won't starve, that's for sure--I'm sure McCourt will make a profit off the Dodgers somehow.

I just dont see how he is playing the "unconstitutional" card. The dodgers are a franchise of a larger company MLB. If i bought a McDonald's or Taco Bell or what have you and kept it in disrepair McDonalds could and probably take away the franchise because of the agreement i signed when i bought said franchise.

In short, if frank doesnt think the "for the good of baseball" clause he signed in his contract then he doesnt have to be a part of the club. Sell the team.

Frankie on Squawk Box this morning: SOS.Same old shit.Says there is no reason for the "takeover." Claims the $100 million was $7 million to him and Jamie over 7 years, and the rest a "loan" against Dodger and real estate assets that is to be paid back. Fails to explain gross overpayment to sons for compensation.Claims that the deal w/ Fox ($3B over 20 years) will infuse $300 mil immediately into the club. Also says he will sign agreement that NONE of the new money will go to him or his divorce.